To be fair, recent litigation has every appearance to me of being a patent war. Apple (add MS too) is trying their their best to litigate Android out of existence rather than let normal market forces rule. While Microsoft might be just as happy to license them to death, Apple isn't likely to agree to any licensing of tech that courts don't demand of it. They (and perhaps it's driven primarily by Mr. Jobs) just want them gone from the market by whatever means necessary IMHO. Just my 2 cents.

If, and I repeat *if*, Google did steal IP to build Android, they Apple and others are perfectly right to sue them into submission. It's all well and good to say "innovate and compete, don't get legal" but when they're trying to compete with stolen property, they would deserve to be nuked out of existence. They can't claim competition when they're stealing the other teams playbook.

The "Blackberry-like" prototype so often mentioned here was only one of at least 5 different mockups Google showed around using different hardware setups and form factors, and produced by various mobile manufacturers. Among those 5 was at least one with a touchscrren interface rather than rocker or trackball.

EDIT: I'm reposting a timeline of Google mobile rumors and news here. Note that Google's first forays into the mobile space go back to 2001, with the initial rumors of a Google smartphone being heard as early as 2004, predating the iPhone release by three years, and well before Eric Schmidt arrived on Apple's board.

The "Blackberry-like" prototype so often mentioned here was only one of at least 5 different mockups Google showed around using different hardware setups and form factors, and produced by various mobile manufacturers. Among those 5 was at least one with a touchscrren interface rather than rocker or trackball.

Never seen the other ones. Clearly google was gunning more for blackberry type use case. Even if there was a touch screen device we dont know if it was before or after google snooped out the iphone design. And even if before it shows that this was not the main direction they were going in or focusing on.

Keep in mind out of the 5 prototypes G1 was a touchscreen. So clearly apple's vision had a big impact on android as they chose to launch a form factor that had only 1 in 5 chance, instead of a design with 4 in 5 change of being first.

If, and I repeat *if*, Google did steal IP to build Android, they Apple and others are perfectly right to sue them into submission. It's all well and good to say "innovate and compete, don't get legal" but when they're trying to compete with stolen property, they would deserve to be nuked out of existence. They can't claim competition when they're stealing the other teams playbook.

A big part of the problem is what do you mean by 'steal IP'. Do you for example think that Apple stole IP from the playlist patent troll they had to pay recently? Did they steal IP from Nokia? From S3? From Kodak?

Every firm inevitably infringes on patents when they produce a new product, it's probably impossible at this point to avoid it because Patents have been allowed that are insanely broad or obvious in light of prior art.

This isn't an open/shut case of good firms and evil. This is all shades of grey.

To be fair, recent litigation has every appearance to me of being a patent war. Apple (add MS too) is trying their their best to litigate Android out of existence rather than let normal market forces rule. While Microsoft might be just as happy to license them to death, Apple isn't likely to agree to any licensing of tech that courts don't demand of it. They (and perhaps it's driven primarily by Mr. Jobs) just want them gone from the market by whatever means necessary IMHO. Just my 2 cents.

I absolutely disagree. Normal market forces do not include the wholesale pilfering of intellectual property - if that were true than nobody would innovate because the cost of doing so would exceed the return on the investment.

Patents, and their enforcement, have a legitimate place and Apple has every right to defend its IP, regardless of what people have to say about it.

Listen, what HTC and these other guys are essentially arguing is this: you (Apple) should be ok with us stealing from you.

I think its hilarious that Apple's number one competition is whining about patents. I mean, the company innovated with the iPhone, and everybody played catch up. Now, here we are years later, the iPhone still doing very strongly and people are whining about Apple protecting its intellectual property. This on the back of Android and HTC losing the so called patent war. So what do these corporate giants do in the face of strong competition?

They whine, they complain that the company setting the pace for the technology industry is protecting its innovations. They complain Apple is starting a patent war because they are suffering from not being able to copy without paying royalties.

Is it time to put Android to bed? Or are we going to start coming out with new innovative products that are designed to be really great Android products? Not just something that is supposed to be like the iPhone.

Acer's Captain, JT Wang, should worry about his own ship. The last time I checked, it was taking on water.

Apple isn't an underdog anymore. They been there. They done that. They worked their way from contender to champion the old fashion way. Through hard work and innovation.

I don't blame Apple for finally protecting their innovation. The last time I checked, there's a HUGE mobile war going on. The time is now to break away from the pack. If they don't do it, someone else will. Apple needs to squash all these these pretenders and imitators.

I absolutely disagree. Normal market forces do not include the wholesale pilfering of intellectual property - if that were true than nobody would innovate because the cost of doing so would exceed the return on the investment.

Patents, and their enforcement, have a legitimate place and Apple has every right to defend its IP, regardless of what people have to say about it.

Listen, what HTC and these other guys are essentially arguing is this: you should be ok with us stealing from you.

Would you be ok with that?

They could have licensed the tech and avoid all this crap, but for some reason no one seems to be doing that.

Maybe we need some sort of software that checks you device against patents and tells you what you have infringed. Instead of reengineering you just pay a small fee and you are good to go.

I'm beginning to understand what Apple plans to use their $76 billion pot of gold for. They could easily hire a thousand top notch lawyers and vigorously defend every single patent they have and still not put a dent in that pile. They might even make money at it.

I absolutely disagree. Normal market forces do not include the wholesale pilfering of intellectual property - if that were true than nobody would innovate because the cost of doing so would exceed the return on the investment.

So Apple, by infringing Nokia, Personal Audio LLC possibly S3, Kodak and more is doing something outside normal market forces? This is a more complex topic than you wish to make it.

Wang has always been jealous of Apple's successes. And he thinks that saying something out loud about patent infringements (even if Acer is not being sued by Apple) will help push his junk products to consumers' hands.

So Apple, by infringing Nokia, Personal Audio LLC possibly S3, Kodak and more is doing something outside normal market forces? This is a more complex topic than you wish to make it.

I think it is simpler than you want to make it - as simple as the concept of ownership. If I own something, then I retain the right to allow you to use it on whatever terms I want to establish, or to not allow you to use it at all. Why? Because it is mine - it belongs to me. Your inability to come to terms with my ownership is not grounds for me to consider surrendering it.

And yes, it works both ways, and Apple faces the same dilemma with those who hold patents it may be infringing.

What you are arguing is, I think, that it might be a better strategic choice for Apple to allow licensure, perhaps because it would be preferable to being taken to task in those areas where they themselves may be guilty of infringement.

A few points to consider, though:

1) You don't know if Apple has offered licensing terms. For all we know, they have, and the other firms have elected to force litigation by refusing those terms.

2) Apple is the most sued company on earth, at the moment - so you are assuming that Apple is not currently being pursued for infringement by their competitors - perhaps they are. In that context, Apple's pursuit of patent infringement cases against competitors makes perfect sense.

To be fair, recent litigation has every appearance to me of being a patent war. Apple (add MS too) is trying their their best to litigate Android out of existence rather than let normal market forces rule. While Microsoft might be just as happy to license them to death, Apple isn't likely to agree to any licensing of tech that courts don't demand of it. They (and perhaps it's driven primarily by Mr. Jobs) just want them gone from the market by whatever means necessary IMHO. Just my 2 cents.

Fair?

Apple invested time and money to revolutionize the industry; is it fair that Google simply copied (read stole) Apples design in order to make a quick buck?

Even with all its capacity to be abused, the patent system does exist for a legitimate reason, and I for one can't think of a better example of that reason than this "patent war."